[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRKhvdPBHa4[/media]
Today, we take a look at the Internet's latest "indie darling:" SUPERHOT. It has become the fastest-approved game in the history of Steam Greenlight, and garnered hundreds of thousands of fans, despite only currently existing as a roughly 5-minute "trial version." In this video, we see if the praise is well-deserved (SPOILER: It isn't).
I have got to be honest, if this is your video then you are fucking whiny.
It's blatantly obvious that SUPERHOT was released as a concept for the game mechanic yet you are complaining that the gun model is ugly.
[QUOTE=MOMENTO;42250669]I like how someone rated an 8 minute video dumb, 4 minutes after it was posted[/QUOTE]
I rated it dumb rather early just from the stupidity of complaining about a lack of HD assets in a concept demo.
I like how someone rated an 8 minute video dumb, 4 minutes after it was posted
This is pathetic.
[QUOTE=Thlis;42250654]I have got to be honest, if this is your video then you are fucking whiny.
It's blatantly obvious that SUPERHOT was released as a concept for the game mechanic yet you are complaining that the gun model is ugly.[/QUOTE]
This is not my video.
And yes you are right, it is blatantly obvious that SUPERHOT was a concept, that's why there's a disclaimer where he says that he knows it's a proof of concept. Also, it doesn't do a very good job of proving the concept, if you actually paid attention to the video.
Glad I could help!
Given this guy's overall tone and approach to discussing the game, I could not stand his complaints about it being pretentious.
[QUOTE=Thlis;42250654]
I rated it dumb rather early just from the stupidity of complaining about a lack of HD assets in a concept demo.[/QUOTE]
to be fair, the game has no fucking textures
He's trying to hard to review a concept game, it's obvious that there's no need to try improving the aesthetics so drastically when it's just a demonstration of what can and could do.
I mean come on, it's just 3 or 4 levels to show how the game mechanics work, it's not supposed to be a full release of an indie game.
He's also a huge douchebag calling the developer a "pretentious schmuck to ever walk the Earth" and saying it's a joke game concept. What kind of reviewer is this just assuming things like that?
[QUOTE=Pawnstick;42250682]This is not my video.
And yes you are right, it is blatantly obvious that SUPERHOT was a concept, that's why there's a disclaimer where he says that he knows it's a proof of concept. Also, it doesn't do a very good job of proving the concept, if you actually paid attention to the video.
Glad I could help![/QUOTE]
Not your video yet there were only 29 views on it.
Yeah, the concept is apparently ruined since someone managed to get footage of playing through some levels while moving constantly. It would be interesting to hear how many times "he" had to play through it to get that footage.
[QUOTE=MOMENTO;42250689]to be fair, the game has no fucking textures[/QUOTE]
Do you have any concept of how games are developed? Someone making a quick game based on a mechanic won't prioritize graphics.
[QUOTE=MOMENTO;42250689]to be fair, the game has no fucking textures[/QUOTE]
It's a concept? It doesn't need to overdo itself to show off the game mechanics.
This guy is basically just saying how bad Super Hot is, even though he acknowledged it was a 7 day challenge and was a small indie team. What an idiot. Thanks for pointing out that the game made in 7 days by an independent team didnt have tessellation or ambient occlusion or high res textures.
How in the hell could this game be perceived as pretentious? It's literally nothing but bullet time and shooting people executed in a fuckin' rad way.
I think he was referring to the trolling part.
[QUOTE=Thlis;42250701]Not your video yet there were only 29 views on it.
Yeah, the concept is apparently ruined since someone managed to get footage of playing through some levels while moving constantly. It would be interesting to hear how many times "he" had to play through it to get that footage.
Do you have any concept of how games are developed? Someone making a quick game based on a mechanic won't prioritize graphics.[/QUOTE]
See I was thinking that they had no textures for style reasons? So I mean yeah if they add in textures to the full release that's cool.
[QUOTE=Thlis;42250701]Not your video yet there were only 29 views on it.[/QUOTE]
It's like I'm some sort of subscriber to the channel, so I would know when he puts out a new video. No, it's obviously my video.
There are some valid complaints here and there but the guy sounds like an absolute asshole. Pointing out bugs, specially non-game breaking ones, isn't really a valid point you can make when talking about a quickly thrown together demo for a concept.
[QUOTE=MOMENTO;42250689]to be fair, the game has no fucking textures[/QUOTE]
There's baked AO, and for a game that fast-developed and serving as a proof of concept it looks rather slick.
[editline]20th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Del91;42250722]I think he was referring to the trolling part.[/QUOTE]
probably a joke by the devs, they were pretty funny when talking about the game on reddit/greenlight.
Also, I never noticed that NICE VIEW FOR A LAST ONE thing.
Having just experienced a twenty-four hour game jam, I feel most of his complaints show a startling lack of understanding of just how hard it is to polish a gaming experience within such a short time span. I agree the game could be faster or more difficult. But as it stands, it's exactly what it needed to be; a short game demo that achieved a sense of minimal "this is all you need to know just do it and hurry!" theme, whilst remaining a basic, if entertaining game. To actually ask the question of whether or not a developer believes they are making a "genuinely good game" is absolutely insulting and shows a complete disregard for any sense of intelligent critique. While I enjoyed the video's editing , it's content came off as condescending and frankly out-of-touch. I hope whoever makes these videos examines their methodology a bit more closely, and attempts to become a slightly more reasonable critic in the future.
[QUOTE=latin_geek;42250785]There are some valid complaints here and there but the guy sounds like an absolute asshole. Pointing out bugs, specially non-game breaking ones, isn't really a valid point you can make when talking about a quickly thrown together demo for a concept.
There's baked AO, and for a game that fast-developed and serving as a proof of concept it looks rather slick.
[editline]20th September 2013[/editline]
probably a joke by the devs, they were pretty funny when talking about the game on reddit/greenlight.
Also, I never noticed that NICE VIEW FOR A LAST ONE thing.[/QUOTE]
A week + a month since 7dfps ended really gives them no excuse to have any bugs.
it did seem a little pretentious
of course so does this review
This guy probably played the game before it was "YouTube popular" and thought it was okay.
Now he's really upset that it's all over every popular channel so he made this video
Maybe.
[editline]20th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Pawnstick;42250798]A week + a month since 7dfps ended really gives them no excuse to have any bugs.[/QUOTE]
Does it, though? Is this a fact or do we need a giant "This game is a concept." stamp to be rapidly applied to your computer monitor screen
[QUOTE=latin_geek;42250785]
There's baked AO, and for a game that fast-developed and serving as a proof of concept it looks rather slick.[/QUOTE]
oh, ok so like, I thought they had no texture artist, which seemed pretty silly if your getting a dev team together, but in reality their textures are just that flat grey color?
[QUOTE=RaxaHax;42250802]Does it, though?[/QUOTE]
Yes, that's why I said it. My point is better articulated by the author of the video;
[img]http://puu.sh/4vEmi.png[/img]
[QUOTE=Pawnstick;42250798]A week + a month since 7dfps ended really gives them no excuse to have any bugs.[/QUOTE]
Half Life 2 was released 9 years ago, I'm guessing you expect it to be flawless too
[QUOTE=kaze4159;42250822]Half Life 2 was released 9 years ago, I'm guessing you expect it to be flawless too[/QUOTE]
what
Who cares man, seriously. It's a 5-minute concept game that's meant to be played in a certain way and not scrutinized to hell and back in the most condescending way possible.
Seriously, play through it normally and you will literally have no problems or bugs at all.
Also, the looks of the game are completely irrelevant. It's supposed to be minimalist and show off what a game using this move-time concept would feel like, and it does that excellently.
It's not supposed to be even a trial version or a demo or anything. It's LITERALLY only showing an idea. It doesn't have to have 12 billion hours of content and hyper-realistic textures.
This is not a perfect gesamtkunstwerk just yet but it's pretty damn good. This video is just a contrarian ripping on the game for non-issues in order to garner views and get their own 15 minutes of fame.
[QUOTE=Pawnstick;42250825]what[/QUOTE]
He's trying to say that even great games, fully developed by teams of hundreds for years will still have rather plentiful visual display and logic issues. It's kind of unfair to assume a team that likely just got off a 150 hour blitz to get this thing done in a week is really going to want to spend a month to release some hotfixes to fix some minor collision issues and AI pathing issues I haven't seen anyone else come across to get votes on a democratically decided distribution platform. They likely just decided to give the game out immediately (thus allowing people to see and play it), see how greenlight reacted to their first build, then spend the next two months or so to repair it if it was clear that they needed repairs for greenlighting. However, the public spoke, and now their going to be spending this time instead on making the real game work.
Essentially,rather than chase perfection to please Greenlight, they just gave them what they had and wondered if the community wanted more of the concept. Greenlight choose to act fast on what they had and they'd rather spend that time that would have been wasted on hotfixes on the real game and not on a 7 day proof of concept.
[QUOTE=Pawnstick;42250816]Yes, that's why I said it. My point is better articulated by the author of the video;
[img]http://puu.sh/4vEmi.png[/img][/QUOTE]
AFAIK they just put up a half-fixed trial a couple days after the 7dfps challenge ended, and then got a massive wave of popularity less than a couple weeks ago, from word of mouth which turned into game journalism articles which turned into more word of mouth.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/6y9FNYC.png[/t]
Even for a game this short, that's not enough time to debug. Much less if you're dealing with tons of unexpected media coverage, and several big websites hammering your servers, making pushing out a new version that much harder.
I agree with EcksDee, he's just trying to get views off this, he complains that indie games overall have bad graphics because of the use of retro style and assumes a developer or team of developers, which I'm assuming they're amateurs, release a demo of a concept with full next-gen graphics and complete balanced gameplay.
He calls them pretentious schmucks, but oh the irony.
"The Dinner Dates" is now someone you should avoid. I also hate how he is putting his "opinion" as a fact calling it a bad game.
[QUOTE=kaze4159;42250822]Half Life 2 was released 9 years ago, I'm guessing you expect it to be flawless too[/QUOTE]
lol even though the guy is an idiot that is a fucking retarded counter argument. HL2 is done, and they still constantly release bug fixes. this game however is unfinished and has a lot of bugs.
[QUOTE=Gwoodman;42250867]"The Dinner Dates" is now someone you should avoid. I also hate how he is putting his "opinion" as a fact calling it a bad game.[/QUOTE]
I really do get annoyed with those people who use opinions in reviews. What the heck is the deal with that!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.